Graham Harrison, suffered from Tourette's syndrome, that it prevented work on a full-time basis.  He applied for partial disability benefits under his employer with prudential insurance company of America was a disability insurance policy.  His physician a neurologist and expert on Tourette Syndrome had recommended that he work at less than full time resources have led his schedule to place for his condition, to chronic anxiety, a broken sleep patterns and excitement.  His doctor felt that a four day work week with a mid week break it would immensely benefit.

Prudential pointed out that Please back benefits.  Prudential's position was that, since he had suffered his records Tourette Syndrome for many years the youngest documented no major change, which would justify a change in his work patterns.  Prudential also felt that if he could work four days there was no reason that it five days not could be working in the week.

On the first prudential relied on the opinion of the "Medical Director" Jill C. Fallon, m.d., a physician, was board certified in occupational medicine but had absolutely no training in neurology or Tourette Syndrome.  This doctor does not even tested the plaintiff.

Prudential have also with the wrong definition of disability in the right to deny.

Mr Harrison appealed the denial of benefits and include additional reports from his well qualified doctors.  On appeal, one of his employees showed doctors prudential of the file of this time, Albert Kowalski, m.d..  Not only Dr. Kowalski had no Board certification in neurology or Psychiatry, he had absolutely no experience in the treatment of Tourette Syndrome, and in fact had no clinical practice since 1987.  Dr. Kowalski did not examine the claimant.  Despite the lack of qualifications and current experience in really patients seen was Dr. Kowalski of the opinion that should have improved condition of the claimant in the course of time.

On the basis of the opinion of Dr. Kowalski, prudential denied the claim.  To deny the appeal, prudential again cited the wrong definition of disability.  The claimant appeal again and this time consulted with yet an expert in Tourette Syndrome.  He was Clinical Professor of Neurology at the Albert Einstein College of medicine and associate professor of Neurology at New York University School of medicine evaluated by Oliver Sacks, m.d..  Dr. sacks had was author of numerous books and articles on Tourette's syndrome.  It was Dr. sacks opinion that Mr Harrison was able to maintain its efforts and function very effectively for only two days in a row and then a one day break to recover.  He can not work on a "standard" five-day week.  This letter of prudential undone by its original decision and awarded the plaintiff benefits.  Prudential but still inappropriate policy provisions and language in fact cited, which nowhere appeared in the plan.

Two months after approval of the claim of prudential re review of the claim started.  This time, prudential took the position that the plaintiff disability psychoneurotic at least in part by a mental disorder or personality was caused and that benefits are limited to 24 months.  Prudential advised the plaintiff that its request would most likely end next month.

The problem with the prudential was denial of the benefits of this time, that there no 24 month limit in this directive.

Prudential is also the file Stephen N. Gerson, m.d.  Dr. Gerson has board certified in psychiatry and geriatric psychiatry but listed important professional activity as a "Web management".  There was no evidence that Dr. Gerson had no training in the treatment of Tourette Syndrome in the file.  He did not examine the claimant.  It was Dr. Gerson believes that the various doctors and the applicant simply did a "preference" for the work of any five-day week.  Shortly after prudential terminated benefits once again.

Mr Harrison action under ERISA.

The Court reversed denial-of-prudential's.  The Court found that "in the worst light, such behavior [misquoting policy provisions] a conscious attempt by prudential a reason for the plaintiff benefits production are."

The Court also ruled that the decision to terminate the benefits was not supported by sufficient evidence.  The Court said that some of the information of prudential had ended, that the doctor in benefits cancellation had delivered one.  The Court found that prudential had not left to stop benefits after it had previously approved benefits on the same information to all the new information.  The Court was also for use by physicians, who examined no experience in Tourette Syndrome, and never, the the plaintiff, prudential critical.

Fairfax, Virginia provides lawyer Ben glass doctor, dentists, lawyers and businessman in long term disability benefit claims.

View the original article here